Hi Iain.
I read that blog post some time ago and am still not very clear on what
is *really* going on, but I'm certainly sure that from our perspective,
busy_dist_port is nothing to be scared of, which is why we don't log it.
So I would not worry.
Cheers, Simon
On 24/05/13 15:35, Iain Hull wrote:
> Hi Simon, Tim,
>> Thanks for your replies and effort analysing my query.
>> On Riak we have experienced stability issues when large data is
> being transferred. I am not too sure the exact root cause, but we see
> busy_dist_port messages then one of the Riak nodes crashes and has to be
> restarted by Chef. Increasing "+zdbbl 18432" resolved this issue.
>> This contains more information about Riak and this setting
>http://boundary.com/blog/2012/09/26/incuriosity-killed-the-infrastructur/>> We have not seen any stability issues with our use of RabbitMQ to date.
> After our Riak experience I was concerned if our RabbitMQ usage pattern
> changes over time (for example message sizes increase), we could
> experience similar stability issues too. If there is a chance of this I
> would like to be warned before its a problem.
>> Iain.
>>> On 21 May 2013 15:38, Simon MacMullen <simon at rabbitmq.com> <mailto:simon at rabbitmq.com>> wrote:
>> To add to what Tim said: I've run some tests with busy_dist_port
> monitoring patched into RabbitMQ and while I can certainly see
> busy_dist_port messages, I haven't been able to demonstrate any
> improvement in throughput by tweaking zdbbl until they went away -
> so I don't see the point in exposing them.
>> Out of interest, did you see a performance improvement in Riak after
> modifying zdbbl, or were you just trying to make the warnings go
> away? :-)
>> Cheers, Simon
>>> On 20/05/13 12:15, Iain Hull wrote:
>> We are in the process of deploying a Riak cluster, and are
> wondering if
> some of the lessons we learned monitoring Erlang in Riak should be
> applied to RabbitMQ.
>> During testing we noticed a lot of busy_dist_port in the logs,
> the root
> was cause was a the Erlang kernel parameter zdbbl was set too
> low. We
> have adjusted the parameter and are now monitoring the logs for
> busy_dist_port errors.
>> I have searched the RabbitMQ mailing list for cases of
> busy_dist_port or
> zdbbl, but cannot find any. I am wondering if RabbitMQ can
> suffer from
> problems with busy_dist_port or if zdbbl should be set to any
> particular
> value? Or I should I monitor the RabbitMQ logs for busy_dist_port?
>> Thanks,
> Iain.
>> --
> Iain Hull
> Senior Software Engineer
> iain.hull.workday (Skype)
>iain.hull at workday.com <mailto:iain.hull at workday.com>
> <mailto:iain.hull at workday.com <mailto:iain.hull at workday.com>>
>> <http://www.workday.com/__signature-uk> <http://www.workday.com/signature-uk>>
>>>> _________________________________________________
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
>rabbitmq-discuss at lists.__rabbitmq.com> <mailto:rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com>
>https://lists.rabbitmq.com/__cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/__rabbitmq-discuss> <https://lists.rabbitmq.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rabbitmq-discuss>
>>>> --
> Simon MacMullen
> RabbitMQ, Pivotal
>>>>> --
> Iain Hull
> Senior Software Engineer
> iain.hull.workday (Skype)
>iain.hull at workday.com <mailto:iain.hull at workday.com>
>> <http://www.workday.com/signature-uk>
--
Simon MacMullen
RabbitMQ, Pivotal